Well crap, I was going to find the article and link it here just so I could back up my statement. I know I read it somewhere...

Anyways, as for Charlie, well I've been a fan of his since "It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia." He's not the most versatile actor in the world, so when I knew he was going to be in this movie I pretty much knew what to expect. I personally didn't have a problem with him though.

GDT said in an interview that I saw on IGN that they wrote a very detailed outline, although now I can't remember how long he said it was. He made it pretty clear that they have a lot of material for the sequel, and the video game that he is hoping to make.

^ Superman and Star Trek are known properties and Pacific Rim is not only unknown, but probably comes off like another Battle: Los Angeles. And besides, not everyone thinks that Man of Steel or Into Darkness were below average.

^ Superman and Star Trek are known properties and Pacific Rim is not only unknown, but probably comes off like another Battle: Los Angeles. And besides, not everyone thinks that Man of Steel or Into Darkness were below average.

Click to expand...

People also complain about the lack of originality. As for Battle: Los Angeles, there was more damage in Man of Steel and Star Trek into Darkness.